The Editor and the Judge
A Seattle newspaper editor faces a contempt of court charge after criticizing a local judge, highlighting early tensions between the press and the bench.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
Five hours were taken up in the municipal court yesterday afternoon by the arguments to the demurrer to the complaint charging Charles H. Lugrin, editor of the Telegraph, with contempt in having printed certain articles alleged to throw odium on Judge Glasgow. The counsel for the defense brought forth two points: that the complaint did not state sufficient facts to constitute an offense, and that the court had no authority in the matter, being a minor court. It was allowed that the court had the inherent right to punish contempt when perpetrated in the court during an action, but not otherwise. The prosecution argued that the municipal court had concurrent jurisdiction with the superior court. The judge, taking the matter under advisement, noted that he was 'between the devil and the deep blue sea,' as no matter how he decided, the Telegraph would attack the decision.
“The court was between the devil and the sea.”
This 1894 clash over judicial criticism echoes modern debates about the limits of free speech and the accountability of the judiciary in the public eye.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.